journal article·2025-12

Analysis and Modeling of Spatial Distributions of Adatoms on Metal Surfaces: The Role of Anisotropic Exclusion Zone

Jazmin Aragón Sánchez, Antonio Caporale, Roberto Martini, Massimo Fanfoni, Luca Persichetti, Luca Camilli

Publisher page

Abstract

Several parameters could affect the spatial distribution of particles in an anisotropic environment. To disentangle these effects, a thorough comparison between experimental and simulated data is necessary. Fluorine atoms adsorbed on the Ag(110) surface are used as a case study. First neighbor distance and Voronoi tessellation analysis reveal deviations from a purely random distribution, indicating the presence of spatial correlation. Further insights are provided by the pair correlation function, which reveals a rectangular exclusion zone aligned with the crystallographic axes of the Ag(110) substrate. Monte Carlo simulations have been performed, incorporating key factors such as the anisotropic surface geometry, the anisotropic exclusion zone, and the different adsorption probabilities of the adatoms. These results suggest that within this set of parameters the anisotropic exclusion zone plays the main role in shaping the spatial distribution of adatoms, shedding light on the interplay between substrate structure and adsorption processes.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Stochastic processes and statistical mechanics · Cellular Automata and Applications · Evacuation and Crowd Dynamics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Dipartimento di Fisica Università di Roma “Tor Vergata” Via della Ricerca Scientifica 1‐00133 Rome Italy

References (26)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1103/PhysRevE.68.04111310.1103/PhysRevE.68.041113 ↗
2. 10.1103/PhysRevB.107.09450810.1103/PhysRevB.107.094508 ↗
3. 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae38310.1093/pnasnexus/pgae383 ↗
4. 10.1103/PhysRevE.109.04413110.1103/PhysRevE.109.044131 ↗
5. 10.1103/PhysRevB.78.14410110.1103/PhysRevB.78.144101 ↗
6. 10.1103/PhysRevE.89.02272110.1103/PhysRevE.89.022721 ↗
7. 10.1093/mnras/staa137910.1093/mnras/staa1379 ↗
8. 10.3847/1538-4365/ad555910.3847/1538-4365/ad5559 ↗
9. 10.1007/s13174-011-0037-810.1007/s13174-011-0037-8 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.physa.2020.12461810.1016/j.physa.2020.124618 ↗
11. 10.1073/pnas.161020411410.1073/pnas.1610204114 ↗
12. 10.1103/PhysRevE.103.05212610.1103/PhysRevE.103.052126 ↗
13. 10.1103/PhysRevE.78.02140110.1103/PhysRevE.78.021401 ↗
14. 10.1103/PhysRevE.89.04030110.1103/PhysRevE.89.040301 ↗
15. 10.1103/PhysRevE.108.02410310.1103/PhysRevE.108.024103 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.partic.2025.02.02110.1016/j.partic.2025.02.021 ↗
17. 10.1109/JPROC.2021.306177810.1109/JPROC.2021.3061778 ↗
18. 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.1785010.1103/PhysRevB.54.17850 ↗
19. 10.1063/1.134668710.1063/1.1346687 ↗
20. 10.1088/1361-648X/adc64910.1088/1361-648X/adc649 ↗
21. 10.1103/PhysRevB.110.23540710.1103/PhysRevB.110.235407 ↗
22. Sánchez J. A. · Comput. Phys. Commun. · 2019 · 2 · 1
23. Tanemura M. · Forma‐TOKYO · 2003 · 18 · 221
24. 10.1080/0094965800881037010.1080/00949658008810370 ↗
25. 10.1103/PhysRevE.111.04412710.1103/PhysRevE.111.044127 ↗
26. Hill T. L. · 1956